My Guide on Axis Fanboys

Dude, this thread..seriously? bored? XD

cough cough 7 games

didn't you uninstall as well

You seem to have a really skewed definition of the word burn.

cough cough 7 games

didn't you uninstall as well

The primary gripe I had with COH2 was the long load times. I managed to resolve it by experimenting with lower textures. Turns out I load super fast now. Also, I'm not sure what uninstalling the game has to do with posting on the forums. Even if I did uninstall the game, I can and I will post here. I simply called you out for making an anti fanboy thread when you clearly are one your self. Much hypocrisy.

wow 7 games you must be a true axis expert and know everything about this by axis fanboys flooded forum

If anything at all the thread helps to identify who is a true allie fanboy.

If anything at all the thread helps to identify who is a true allie fanboy.

<-----

Normally I'd say that blaming a player's playercard is Ad Hominem, and hardly a valid argument against balance regardless of who makes the argument, but Ninja to be honest you're making the rest of us look bad with your player card, please go play some games as axis and then you'll be in a position to criticize more openly.

Normally I'd say that blaming a player's playercard is Ad Hominem, and hardly a valid argument against balance regardless of who makes the argument, but Ninja to be honest you're making the rest of us look bad with your player card, please go play some games as axis and then you'll be in a position to criticize more openly.

Call me crazy, but did you just completely contradict yourself?

I know this is getting off-topic but most of my buddies like to play allies. The amount of people searching as Axis also prevents us from getting a speedy game. I would like to play more Axis, but the general state of team games make me feel dirty when playing Axis

It might result in a shit-storm but anyway:

A game with mirrored armies would be incredibly boring. I think we can agree on that.

Thus faction A does have vehicles with other stats than faction B.

Faction A´s best vehicle does get the lower cost, better anti infantry and general availability while faction B´s best vehicle gets better armor, penetration and vet-bonuses. For some people the latter stats seem more appealing and they will complain about faction A being too weak. But that´s pretty much what asymmetrical balance is about. Make use of the advantages the faction does give you.

Being a game in a historical context makes people biased. Imagine how civil these forums would be if it was red army (no pun intended) versus blue army.

But being about historical events, I agree with "German fanboys" that it would be incredibly dull to have T-34s beating Panthers one on one. That is just not how it worked. I feel there still needs to be some inspiration to real events. Thus the advantage of the better individual tanks in-game does go to the Germans.

^Pretty freaking much

Call me crazy, but did you just completely contradict yourself?

No, because I play plenty of axis. Check my AT games. And coming from a guy with a handful of Allies AT games and a whopping total of 21 random team/1v1s as Allies, I'd say you're right to be called crazy.

No, because I play plenty of axis. Check my AT games.

-steam id set to private

-steam id set to private

?

?

you have set your playerard to private, you are the only one who can see it

you have set your playerard to private, you are the only one who can see it

ah so I do, thanks for pointing that out. should be fixed now

Somehow the advantage of axis stuff is portrayed in the game, for example panthers beating t-34 in 1v1 (not that that really is an advantage at all, it justs shows that panther is better than a t-34 in 1v1)

While all the allied advantages get thrown out of the water and are left behind.


For example, the KT has better armor, better penetration than the IS-2, and better reload.... Okay.. Fine.

Then the KT main gun also has way more AOE and more accurate than the IS-2. ???

You might say, the KT was better than the IS-2 ,not that that exactly is true but in 1v1 fight it does make sense, but okay fine.


Then i could say that the IS-2 is superior to the TIGER I (which is mostly right)

But relic just basically gives IS-2 so the IS-2 has equal survivability againts german AT as the tiger to soviet AT,
and gives it a wholly inadequate gun, the IS-2 which was meant to smash fortifications and infantry, is wholly inadequate againts infantry due to it's gun missing all the time.


Question to relic... Where is the historical accuracy now?



T-34/76 has a poorer gun than the PIV, slower reload, okay fine..


But for some reason it ALSO has less armor than a PIV, and less speed due to blitzkrieg vet 1, and it's gun is also incredibly inneficent againts infantry when compared to the PIV, not to mention the pintle mounted machine gun...

Things like obersoldaten just obliterating everything is just pure fantasy, especially considering OKW is meant to represent german army of 44, so really, they should have inferior troops when compared to ostheer, not better.


For some reason axis infantry get basic weaponry for upgrades, while soviets have to use doctrines to get that.

I could go on and on, but you get the point.




Relic doesn't only portray the somewhat i guess realistic "advantages" Germany had over its competitors, they just go all out and make axis superior in every single way.

Bad balance, and bad historical accuracy.

Very good points Burt. There are a lot of things at work that made me decide to write this post.

It is like what you said:lack of good balance (in 4v4 games at least and historical accuracy

Obviously, if this game was too realistic, we would have Soviet might rolling all over the Germans; gameplay>realism especially in a computer game. However, I believe the current state of the game is not fun at all. Just the way the factions are designed leads to very frustrating and annoying gameplay.


Plus there are many WW2 myths being spread about all along media, games, etc., but that is too long to get into.

Basically this topic is a reaction to bad balance, bad design, and lack of historical accuracy on relics part. In addition, people defending the status quo using silly historical quibbles about Axis dominance doesn't help as well.

The post was meant in jest, even if it wasn't all that amusing. There is no need for people to come in here and act a fool. Many of you take balance issues too personally.

Losing or winning a game as [insert faction] does not mean it's balanced or unbalanced.

The number of games someone has played does not necessarily make their point invalid.

Pretending you're a master debater by calling out other peoples fallacies (while simultaneously using them yourself) does not automatically make them wrong, and you right.

I am tempted to lock this thread, but my faith in you lot is great, if ill-advised. Keep it together folks.

Very good points Burt. There are a lot of things at work that made me decide to write this post.

It is like what you said:lack of good balance (in 4v4 games at least and historical accuracy

Obviously, if this game was too realistic, we would have Soviet might rolling all over the Germans; gameplay>realism especially in a computer game. However, I believe the current state of the game is not fun at all. Just the way the factions are designed leads to very frustrating and annoying gameplay.


Plus there are many WW2 myths being spread about all along media, games, etc., but that is too long to get into.

Basically this topic is a reaction to bad balance, bad design, and lack of historical accuracy on relics part. In addition, people defending the status quo using silly historical quibbles about Axis dominance doesn't help as well.

If this game was realistic, then it wouldn't be soviets streamrolling everything. COH2 is on the tactical level. Germans on the tactical level were ahead againts the soviets, if only slightly in 1944. They could still achieve tactical victories even in 1944, but then again, that doesn't really matter since they were never able to materialize their tactical victories into operational success. Something that the soviets were very well capable of doing .


That's where the stories of german "millitary dominance"

So if this game was historical, it would be quite balanced, if done right.